Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of
Paclitaxel-Cisplatin (TP) vs
Cyclophosphamide-Cisplatin (CP) in Women
with Advanced Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: Results from a Randomized Trial
Ivor Benjamin, MD
OncoLink Assistant Editor
Last Modified: May 21, 2000
Presenter: Hugh Walker Affiliation: Queens Univ. and Tom Baker Cancer Ctr, Canada
Background: This sub-analysis of 160 patients in the intergroup trial (EORTC-GCCG, NOCOVA, NCIC-CTG, SGCSG) compares the cost effectiveness of paclitaxel (Taxol) - cisplatin (TP) vs. cyclophosfamide-cisplatin in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer.
Materials and Methods:
160 of 680 patients originally randomized to receive TP vs. CP were analyzed for cost comparison.
The study group were the patients randomized by the NCIC-CTG in the original trial.
Cost-effectiveness (CE) defined as incremental cost per incremental life-year gained) based on median overall survival in Canadian patients.
CE was $13,135 (US Dollars) for TP vs. CP
The gross cost per progression-free life year gained on the TP arm was $21,321
CE for the gain in overall survival from TP is well below the commonly cited threshold for cost-effective care of $50,000 per incremental life-year of overall survival.
TP has acceptable CE in the treatment of epithelial ovarian cancer
When compared with other life-extending therapies (e.g. renal dialysis) TP is cost effective
Oncologists treating ovarian cancer patients with TP may wish to cite this study if their patients are denied reimbursement by health insurance providers.
Jun 4, 2013 - For women with advanced epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who have undergone surgery and first-line chemotherapy, maintenance therapy with pazopanib is associated with significant longer median progression-free survival versus placebo, according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, held from May 31 to June 4 in Chicago.